Nicola Tesla was an eccentric, confused, sometimes reckless, genius inventor with strong humanitarian tendencies who wanted to give the human race free, unlimited, clean energy. J. P. Morgan initially funded Tesla's project, but it is said that Morgan got Tesla out on a limb and then sawed it off.
...in 1903, when the tower structure was near completion, it was still not yet functional due to last-minute design changes that introduced in an unintentional defect. When Morgan wanted to know "Where can I put the meter?", Tesla had no answer. Tesla's vision of free power did not agree with Morgan's worldview. Construction costs eventually exceeded the money provided by Morgan, and additional financiers were reluctant to come forth. By July 1904, Morgan (and the other investors) finally decided they would not provide any additional financing. Morgan also encouraged other investors to avoid the project.1
"Tesla's vision of free power did not agree with Morgan's worldview" says it all. "Morgan also encouraged other investors to avoid the project." They conspired to financially ruined Tesla. The robber barons were not above stooping to anything to stop anyone who would harm the robber barons' ability to make their parasitic profits off the masses.
Morgan and his circle didn't want humanity to have free, unlimited, clean energy. Morgan and his kind wanted to keep humanity in the position of having to pay the capitalists for everything. They are still very much at it, these bankers and those they finance. They want everything privatized. It is the vision of the state as the corporation (fascism).
They knew that Tesla represented a huge threat to their selfish, greedy, covetous way. Tesla was intending to generate energy without capitalist supplied fuel but rather from the naturally available energy of the earth's system. Also, Tesla was intending to distribute the energy without wires. Wiring was part of the capitalist's stream from mining, transporting, and manufacturing to delivery and installation of the finished product; and it was their means to meter electricity to charge users. They had to destroy him, to discredit him, to undermine his humanitarian efforts.
Tesla's recklessness was not the issue with these robber barons. It is an issue with us, however. The health consequences of Tesla's plan are at issue. Electromagnetic energy fields can upset the harmony of the body. Also, manipulating the earth's magnetic field and ionosphere can be exceedingly dangerous, especially on the scale Tesla envisioned. Caution is central to avoid selfishness induced catastrophes and negative-health ramifications.
One must note that Tesla was not a real Christian but rather interested in the Vedic and particularly the Buddhist tradition.
Well, there are numerous scientists and inventors who have humanitarian tendencies who still want to give humanity free, unlimited, clean and safe energy and more. The only thing holding them back in the worldly world (the world run by the demonic spirit) is the greedy force, the spirit of the Morgan-minded of this world who control the money.
It is the goal of the Real Liberal Christian Church to bring forth the unselfish spirit.
People, on account of their unselfish mind-set, will be shown how to bring forth energy out of a truly inexhaustible supply.
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)